Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Chanoff v. United States Surgical Corp.

Chanoff v. United States Surgical Corp., 31 F.3d 66 (2d Cir. 1994)

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1994-07-28
Topic: general

PER CURIAM: We affirm for substantially the reasons stated by the district court.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Chanoff v. United States Surgical Corp.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Authority status: pending
Cited by: 3 opinions

31 F.3d 66

William CHANOFF, David Chanoff, Rachel Chanoff and Harriet
Fingerote, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
UNITED STATES SURGICAL CORPORATION, Leon Hirsch, Turi
Josefson, Bruce C. Lustman and Marianne Scipione,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 2068, Docket 94-7332.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued July 21, 1994.
Decided July 28, 1994.

Plaintiffs-appellants appeal from Judge Nevas's ruling granting defendants-appellees' Rule 12(b)(6) motion with respect to plaintiffs' claims of, inter alia, common law fraud and federal securities violations. We affirm.

Barbara Moses, New York City (Gregory A. Markel, Gary E. Weiss, Michael B. Carlinsky, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, New York City, Thomas J. Byrne, James T. Shearin, Pullman & Comley, Bridgeport, CT, of counsel), for appellants.

Dale A. Schreiber, New York City (Charles S. Sims, Lawrence S. Block, Proskauer Rose Goetz & Mendelsohn, of counsel), for appellees.

Prior report: 857 F.Supp. 1011.

Before: WINTER, McLAUGHLIN, and JACOBS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

We affirm for substantially the reasons stated by the district court.